http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/blog/2007/11/obama_responds_to _flag_photo.html
Obama responds to flag photo by John McCormick MUSCATINE, Iowa The photo continues to circulate on the Internet and a voter here this afternoon asked Sen. Barack Obama to explain why he did not have his hand over his heart in front of a giant American flag when the other candidates standing next to him did. Calling the viral e-mail a "classic dirty trick," the Illinois Democrat told his supporters to correct the record and that the image is not what it appears to be. "This is just so irritating," Obama responded. "This was not the Pledge of Allegiance. This woman was singing the Star Spangled Banner. Now, I was taught by my grandfather that you put your hands over your heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. The Star Spangled Banner, you sing. So that's what I did." The photo was taken this summer at Sen. Tom Harkin's annual steak fry in Indianola, Iowa. "These aren't the only e-mails that are going out," Obama said. "You've got e-mails saying that I'm a Muslim plant that's trying to take over America and this and that and the other." Obama, speaking to about 350 people in the gymnasium of a community center, advised a polite response to those sending around the message. "If you get this e-mail from someone you know, set the record straight," he said. "You don't have to curse them out, just tell them that they are misinformed." [story continues about other topics] On 11/28/07 5:54 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I dont have a dog in this fight as I reject the advances of both the > Stupid Party AND > the Evil Party, but as far as Obama is concerned, the picture is "real" in > that it > has not been Photoshopped®. Unless you believe the NYT is wedded to knowingly > publishing Photoshopped® images.... > > If you DO believe the NYT is cavalier about publishing > "doctered" images, I can cite you some cases whereby staff and > wire-service photographers have been fired for doing exactly that. They > take photographic authenticity VERY seriously > at The Times. > > Furthermore, it's pretty difficult for an amateur to "doctor" a video, at > least to the extent > the one on Snopes.com would need to be "doctored." > > So, while Patrick can be chided for accidently spamming the list with a > photo with content that some find objectionable, he cannot be criticized > for sending out a FAKE photograph > or as someone suggested, perpetuating a lie, as for better or worse, the > photo has not been altered....it is authentic. This is the rare case in > which the people who are spreading the > rumor the photo is FAKE...are actually...dare I say it..........lying. > > yours in solidarity, > > --tf > >
